About this Show

Hardball With Chris Matthews

News/Business. (2011) (CC)

NETWORK

DURATION
01:00:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Port 50001

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
mp2

PIXEL WIDTH
720

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

America 11, Grover Norquist 7, Murdoch 6, Rebekah Brooks 6, Michele Bachmann 6, Msnbc 5, Scotland 5, Rupert Murdoch 5, Rupert 4, Andy Coulson 3, Medicare 3, Boehner 3, Grover 3, Brooks 3, Clark 3, David Cameron 3, Us 3, Colson 2, Coulson 2, David Korn 2,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  MSNBC    Hardball With Chris Matthews    News/Business.  (2011)  (CC)  

    July 18, 2011
    11:00 - 12:00am PDT  

11:00pm
tonight. tonight in our survey i asked do you think president obama should cave on tax increases? 3% said yes, 97% of you said no. i hope he gets the deal he wants. that's the ed show. i'm ed schultz. the last word with lawrence o'donnell starts right now. gop meets government on protests. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in san francisco. leading off today, my way or nothing, what the republicans are telling president obama these days. do things entirely our way or we'll put the government in default. the republican party shown it's not an opposition party looking to govern or even co-govern. it's a protest party. a party neither makes or takes responsibility for its actions. in a poll out today showing voters are not supporting this republican tea party approach.
11:01pm
plus, pay attention to the man behind the curtain. really pay attention. the gop the refusal to raise any taxes under any circumstances is matching the clear purposes the man pushing republican tax policy right now. one man. grover norquist, the most powerful man most americans have never heard of plays "hardball" here tonight. plus, another day, another resignation in the murdoch scandal. this time the number two man in scotland yard. one day after number one man went belly up. and easy to follow flow chart tonight of the tangled relationships between and among murdoch's people and the police and will ask, is it happening here in america as well? if you've never heard that michele bachmann referred to homosexuality at bondage, despair and enslavement, gay rights groups have and are making sure will you. tonight, anything you say, or certainly anything michele bachmann says, will be used against you in the court of public opinion. let me finish tonight with a
11:02pm
great moment for america. even if defeat at the world cup. we start with the republicans as a protest party. david korn and an msnbc political analyst and pat buchanan, a political analyst as well for msnbc. i was watching you on "morning joe." working both ends ever the block. 12 hours after you began your day. never seen a republican democrat party, we have is a position, take it or leave it. we're not dealing at all with you. what do you think of the party platform now. the republican party, the tea part platform in effect coming out of the house? >> i think the tea party has taken a p.r. beating you or others have described, chris. in public opinion as an intransigent group. the truth is they're going to win this battle. i'll tell you why. at the end of the day, we are going to get an increase in the debt ceiling. we are going to get budget cuts, maybe of $2 trillion, $1.5
11:03pm
trillion or $1 trillion. we're going to get no new revenue no new taxes nap is exactly the position of the republican party and the tea party movement. no new tax, let's cut the budget and have gotten it, quite frankly, chris, by digging their feet in, being tough, being -- resistant and standing by their principles. >> what day will this occur? if this deal's a success? the success of the intransigent says, my way or the highway? when will they win the battle? this month or next month? >> it may be before august 2nd. if not the week after. >> won't be damage to the country? won't have inflicted damage to the country to get their way? >> my guess, republicans, boehner and others after they get their cup, cap and balance vote behind them will move to do it by the 2nd of august. i think boehner and the democrats will agree a one week, say, increase in the debt ceiling so they can put it all together so it's perils of pauline and the tea party wins. >> okay, okay. the tea party wins. david korn, i don't agree. do you agree? >> no. i think the gop is all tail and no dog now.
11:04pm
the tail is the tea party. look at the recent polling. we may get to that later. >> let's look at the new polling. you've raised a good question. ap new cbs poll, you giving orders now, david. shows the president up happy in debt negotiation but far less approving of president obama. knop great winners. president, 43% approve, 48% days glee. better than democrats. 31%, 58% disapprove. and look at republicans. they are taking a beating. 21% approve and 71% disapprove. pat, you say though republicans don't like the approach, amend the constitution, cap and do this stuff, 18% of the gdp and all this, social engineering here, fiscal engineering and risk default by our government, perhaps a spike in the interest rate and all think this at no cost. your new tea party confederates will succeed? >> to this extent, we'll get the debt ceiling increase and barack obama will have to go to his democratic party and say to
11:05pm
them, look, we got $1 trillion in cuts or $2 trillion in budget cuts, spending program, the programs we love. no revenues or new taxes. you're going to have a war inside your own party, because you're going to have lost this battle. >> let me ask you, david, i don't agree with that. that whole proposition is troublemaking. i think you're suggesting a deal that won't be cut. david, do you think the president of the united states and democrat, would ever cut a deal all spending cuts on the domestic side and no increases in revenue? could we ever make a deal like that? >> chris, i was on a call, on the record conference call, with the white house this afternoon, with dan pfeiffer and jason fuhrman, and i asked him that question. can there be any package without revenues? the president's position, he talked about last week, no, there will not be. seems right now john boehner doesn't have 218 votes for
11:06pm
almost anything. no matter the deals. whether $10 trillion or $100 million. you're going to need democratic votes. the democrats i don't think will go along way package if there are just cuts, particularly if there are benefit cuts to medicare and social security and no revenue. there's still a lot of negotiations to be played out and in the meantime, day by day, the republicans are working intransigent and willing to play with fire, because you agree at least half of the members of the house republicans do want to blow up government. it's like blowing up the village to save the village. >> you're laughing. are you happy with your party being the party of mrs. o'leary's cow? basically starting the fire that was just mentioned. we've started it but helped put it out. this is where i think you have a problem. sure, do your show trial with the stuff about how we'll cut the budget down, use the constitution. you won't get the two-thirds vote, not even to 290. probably. all this effort to put on a show's dance back from your dance wit devil and somehow if you've started the fire sneak back to a position of 218 for a
11:07pm
cover, keep it going, kick the can. why do you think republicans having been galvanized to this far right position will go so easily into the good night and accept a deal that keeps the debt ceiling going up? why do you think they'll be roused by the tea party types? >> cut the deal, i believe, chris, because they will have gotten their vote on cut, cap and balance. that will go through. >> so what? >> you keep talking obama's not going to sign anything and doesn't have tax increases. he indicated no tax revenue. ho will you get taxes from the president's desk if you can't get them through the house? >> don't you think they'll end up separating the two issues of debt ceiling and deaf it? >> what should happen. if you want fights over revenue and spending cuts do it separately up to the next election. at this point in time i this the public is spooked enough. i think -- moody's is spooked enough, obama has leverage. >> i think you're wrong. you're usually right about this.
11:08pm
your party so hopped up and so red hot and so tea partied out here and then come back from this week and be sort of team players. here's congressman jim jordan, chairman of the republican study committee on voting on getting 218 votes for mitch mcconnell's plan, sort of the stop gap plan here. let's listen to what he says. >> the mcconnell plan doesn't have 218 republican votes. knop way. i'm telling you house conservative members, members of the republican senate, they won't support mcconnell plan. i'm not going to support the mcconnell plan. >> come back from the red hot position this week putting on their show with the constitutional amendment that stuff, and be dealmakers. you stick to that? >> sure. boehner will work out a deal. the mcconnell plan -- chris >> no cuts in it either. should -- it has no taxes. no spending cuts. >> no revenue. it's going to be $2 trillion. it's $1.5 trillion in spending cuts. what are you talking about? that's going to be the deal. >> i think they're going with separation. >> and david, i believe i got to go with big spending cuts in revenues. makes no sense. >> i think the president, i said
11:09pm
earlier, has leverage at this point because republicans depicted themselves as hostage-takers ready to blow things up and the public doesn't like this. they stood their ground. pat's right about that. the tea party people would be happy to see $100 billion cut out of the next budget which is in the bill that's up this week, even if that leads tos 700,000 lost jobs. happy top do safety inspections, environmental protection. this is what they want to do and stand by -- >> let's get back to reality. back to reality -- >> no. this is the reality, pat. >> david, what about -- >> david, hold on. let pat make his case. >> let me ask you this, chris. the republicans, say the mcconnell plan has a trillion or a trillion and a half in budget cuts in it. >> i don't think it does. >> in the house it passes. they send it to the president. he's going to veto it, shut down the government and puts if default? come on. >> the whole idea, mcconnell's,
11:10pm
separate cuts from spending -- separate the ideological war faire to keep the country from debate. you seem to be one of the happy indians. dress up lie indians and put on a show. they're running around burning down houses. it's a different type of tea party. >> they threw the tea in the harbor. you know know the history. >> pretty good. not exactly the dangerous stiff they're doing now. this is mrs. o'leery's cow politics. >> the markets understand what's going on here. that's why the republican dollar -- why u.s. bonds are at 3%. >> pat, we know your brand of politics is not 218 votes in the house of representatives. probably you're right. steny hoyer will come up with 100 democrats. >> right. >> this fella boehner, 118. pull 218 together. on a package basically separating debt ceiling increasing from deficit reduction. don't you agree? david?
11:11pm
that's what they have to do? >> this will not be a -- >> okay. >> this will not be a package the tea party can claim credit for and it's nothing they can take to the bank. >> you're not sounding like a winner, david. >> back to brinkmanship. do you think this is healthy one party becomes a protest party instead of waving placards and spitting on congressmen when they walk by, this party moved into the halls of congress and is now controlling the process. is that good for american politics, to have 200 and some members of congress with an attitude? if the other side doesn't agree we bring the house down. is that good for america? >> i think the reality is america is a divided culturally, economically, every other way. no area of agreement. the only way to decide these things is fight it out in the center of the field. negotiations be absurd. obama used them to beat up the republicans. republicans ought to vote what they believe. send it over and let the democrats and the president take it or leave it. >> what's the point of passing measures like congressional amend mountains that don't get the two-thirds vote even in the
11:12pm
republican controlled house? what's the purpose of show events like that? pat? >> the purpose, go home to your people and say, we tried to do this. an awful lot of democratic house members will vote for that balanced -- >> the clock is literally ticking, and they'd rather have these show votes than actually get together. you know, pat, back in december the president showed, as did mitch mcconnell, give him credit, you can compromise pap compromise of both people on the left and right were not only always happy but the tax cut deal, got together, did the hard work and they showed that -- >> in december the president of the united states -- >> and worked things out. when you have the tea party saying we're not even going to talk to you about anything you want, we're going to cut out the air supply -- >> december the president of the united states -- >> let me finish, pat. >> this is -- >> not responsible governance. >> let me ask you this. for a second here, let me report what's going on. my hero and your nemesis winston church hymn i refuse to be non-partisan between the fire
11:13pm
brigade and the fire. the fire brig grade, grown-up, mcconnell, john mccain, lindsay graham and john boehner and the democrats. trying to put out the fire. i'm not saying pelosi, and prying to win their side. grown-ups say stop fighting over this, protect our nation's economy from default and you don't want to join that. you want to join the crazy protesters. >> terrible thing to say. you're saying the motivation of the tea party, whatever you say about these people, it's unpopular what they're doing, getting beat up. standing by their principles. >> they are seeing the economy suffer. >> crazed leaders are telling them, people like bachmann and steve king saying you don't have to worry about default, because there won't really be any. that's the problem. disillusioned. >> playing fire with other people's lives. tea party patriots. >> prices will be paid for this, but not by them. >> okay, pat. otherwise known at mrs. o'leery's cow. just kidding, of course. you are a patriot in your own
11:14pm
strange way, pat buchanan. >> america first. >> oftentimes it has been. the most powerful man americans probably never heard of, grover norquist, with the anti-tax republicans are hog-tied supporting his position on the debt. let's talk to one of the most powerful men in america. when we come back. grover norquist, when we come back in a moment. you're watching "hardball" on msnbc. this past year alone there was a 93% increase in cyber attacks. in financial transactions... on devices... in social interactions... and applications in the cloud. some companies are worried. some, not so much. thanks to a network that secures it all and knows what to keep in, and what to keep out. outsmart the threats. see how at cisco.com cisco.
11:15pm
>> in a bit of you a surprise this there a fluly financial bureau. passing over elizabeth warren who was the driving force of course behind the bureau's creation and has supported passionate by many on the pro resive left. with warren's strong opposition and talk she could run for the senate -- heard it myself up in massachusetts -- against the new senator, scott brown. we'll be right back.
11:16pm
11:17pm
11:18pm
welcome back to "hardball." we're quickly approaching the deadline. the unofficial enforcement of no new taxes is holding up the deal. i think it is in fact grover norquist. thanks for coming on. just to get the people informed about your pledge, we'll read it. we have it now. i pledge to the tax players whatever direct or state to the american people i will, one, oppose any or all efforts to increase the margin 7 income tax rates for business and/or businesses and oppose debt reduction or eliminations or credits unless matched dollar for dollar by further reductions in tax rates. how successful have you been in nailing down republicans in this pledge? >> sure. offering this pledge to candidates for the house and senate and president for the last 24 years.
11:19pm
today 235 members of the house have signed the pledge that are sitting in the house of representatives. 41 senators. so a majority of house members and 41 senators. 1,200 state legislators, 13 governors. >> this is the first time it's had sort of the drama as you know. you're probably happy about this. a lot of people aren't happy. explain why you are willing to hold people to this tax pledge even if it means at least between now and early august no deal and, therefore, a possible default? why are you pushing so hard at this point on keeping people to their pledge? >> well, because the pledge, again, it's been around for 24 years and 1990 george herbert walker bush signed the pledge, why he won the republican primary. >> why are you holding them to it now? at this point, facing this critical situation, where many people believe we face a default sometime early in august, or sooner, perhaps, because there's been no deal in raising the debt
11:20pm
ceiling. why are you holding members of congress to pledged to your organization to rick a default? why are you doing it? >> chris, as you know, because you just read the pledge, the pledge is not to my organization. you just read the fact. >> sure. >> the pledge is to the american people. >> but you wrote it. >> yes. and we offer it to all. it allows them to run for office to make a credible commitment to the american people that he or she won't raise taxes. >> right. >> without the pledge, which is the same wording in all 50 states over the last quarter century. >> sure. >> a promise not to raise taxes is like any other political promise and means nothing. so the strength of the pledge is not that i or others enforce it it's that the voters enforce it because they know what it means. they've seen it. they voted for somebody, as he or she promised to vote for it. the power of the pledge is the power of the american people, not me personally or americans for tax reform, but, rather,
11:21pm
that the pledge is not something you can walk away with and say you were misquoted. >> right. you're defining this in a way. dramatized it. i'm getting back to, you've asked people to make an ironclad pledge i don't your organization. written it, gotten people to sign it. who haven't, encouraged to sign in various ways. push pressure in various ways. my question to you, you hold these people in this organization to this pledge. right? your organization holds them to the pledge. not just the american people generally. you, grover norquist, and your organization, right? hold them to the pledge? you personally hold them to the pledge? >> we urge them to keep the pledge. >> right. that's what i'm saying. who break the pledge, as george herbert walker bush did. >> i know. let me ask you about the situation we're in now. you are telling people to keep their pledge. right? be honest. you're telling them. >> yes, of course. >> telling them --
11:22pm
>> these people ran for office. >> in the face of a financial default, you're willing to take the heat and say, i urge these people to stick to a pledge which i know will prevent a deal, which allows the debt ceiling to go up. just a definition. you agree with what i just said? >> no. i don't think the president of the united states is such a left wing ideologue he would close down the government because he's having a hissy fit he can't get a tax increase. >> a hissy fit? is that how we talk now? a hissy fit? what's that? what's a hissy fit? >> when he says he wants to raise taxes, he'd rather -- you jest said the president would rather close down the government than -- >> no. i'm saying to get a deal between democrats and republicans everyone watching the show knows you need a deal. 4-1, whatever, cutting spending, raising revenue. you're saying no deal, is what you're saying? >> no. a deal which reduces spending and doesn't raise taxes. >> that's the only deal you accept? in other words, nothing that would be agreeable to any of the democrats? >> you're suggesting that the democrats would rather close down the government if they don't get a tax increase i think --
11:23pm
>> no. democrats will agree to a compromise even if it's 4-1 because the president is putting pressure on them. you're saying 4-1 deal isn't good enough for you? >> they agreed not raise taxes and they're not going to raise taxes. >> i've asked five minutes, grover, you're a smart guy and politically aware. will you answer the question, are you happy with this situation that's developed now that because of this pledge that you've arranged people to sign, encouraged them to sign, and they're watchdogging, this pledge will keep a deal from happening between the republicans and democrats, which will allow the debt creeling to go up and avoid default? you're happy with this crisis? >> i disagree with your assumption and assertion. >> tell me how i'm wrong. >> okay. i am glad the taxes will not be raised. >> under any circumstances. >> under any circumstances? >> any circumstances? it's better not to raise taxes, better to have a default than to raise taxes?
11:24pm
you said any circumstances? >> it's better to bring spending down than to either have the default or -- >> they're going to bring spending down. both sides agreed. the president is full forced at least a $3 trillion cut as part of a $4 trillion package. you said i don't want the package. i'd rather have default. just tell me what your position is. >> i want the american people to move forward without a tax increase -- >> and have a default. >> without a default. >> how do you avoid default? if you refuse to raise taxes and the democrats and republicans can't make a deal, you've been talking quite well. the democrats and republicans don't reach a deal you're happy with that resolution, because it proves your point. people will fight taxes more than they'll fight a default? >> i want an agreement that brings down spending. that's what we're fighting for. >> and no tax increases? >> the -- he would rather close down the government, the president says. >> no. he's put out a proposal. let's get to the facts. the president says he wants a $4
11:25pm
trillion package, perhaps $3 trillion in spending cuts pup say, no deal. right? >> it would be more impressive if he'd write down the spending cuts. he still hasn't put together a budget he can show us. >> because you people are refusing to deal on principle pup said five or six times now, no tax increase under any circumstance. that was your phrase. isn't that what you just said? under any circumstance? >> of course, his taxes are not going to be raised. the problem we have, is too much spending. raises taxes does not solve the problem of too much spending. why would you cut, raise taxes when -- >> let me give you numbers. what percentage of gdp comes in? 16. what's going out 24? reconcile the two. 16 is not, 24 too much in spending if you're only raising 16. your on balanced budget is 18. minimum, you got to raise 2% of revenues and you guy, gdp, you don't want to give him anything. eve ton get back up from 16 to 18, where you say want to end up with your balanced budget amendment. can you meet the terms of your
11:26pm
own balanced budget amendment? is that unreasonable? >> you know the reason why tax revenues are closer to 16% than the norm 18% is because so many people are out of work. the reason so many people are out of work is that this administration has spent an awful lot of money and wasted it on stimulus spending. >> you've got all the arguments except the logic. anybody listening knows the arithmetic. revenues are too low for the amount of money committed on spending. >> because of unemployment. >> of course. under your balanced budget amendment, make no allowance for unemployment. it sets a hard core -- >> chris -- >> a ceiling. >> a ceiling of 18%. not a floor. >> of course not. but the fact is you're not providing here for bringing up revenues in any instance. your position, grover to clear this out in. when it gets to july 30th what's
11:27pm
your position on revenues? >> on july 30th that we should -- >> no revenue increase? >> i'm in favor of more federal revenues through more federal employment. >> not by an act of congress? >> not by act of congress, of course not. >> august 15th, your position on revenues? >> the economy and cut spending. >> your position as we go deeper and deeper into what everyone in the world recognizes will be perhaps bankruptcy, basically spikes in the interest rate, reduction in bond ratings and everything else, perhaps the bond vigilantes come in and all that happens through august and you're standing fast to say even in the face of that terror you're saying i'm holding my people. i have 41 senators. i have 235 house members and they better not budge, because i, grover norquist, said so? >> actually, chris, the american people said so, no me. >> on your document. you wrote it. >> the american people -- >> the american people didn't write it. in every poll, republicans are running 21% in approval because of this stand-fast position
11:28pm
you've asserted and prescribed for them, by the way. be honest. you did noticed the problem, high taxes, and gave your prescription. no new taxes and got 41 guys to go along with it. by the way, what do you do with the ones that don't go along with it? let them go, give them a kiss? no. you go after them and go after them. >> we highlight -- >> how about people who say this is bad policy? lugar and grassley, real conservatives who don't believe in your approach. what do you do to them? >> they've staked out an opposition to any tax increase. >> not with you. >> not taken the pledge. she haven't signed the pledge. lugar says he hasn't because he wants to go to a retail sales tax and i hope some day we'll be able to explain you can move to a retail sales tax. it doesn't violate the pledge. >> we're in a really, a, looks to me, like a real conflict between you and me on this,
11:29pm
because i think we need to deal with this debt ceiling issue. you say deal with the revenue issue, period, under any circumstance? >> deal with the spending issue. the government is spending too much money and needs to spend less. >> the president will reduce spending $3 trillion in exchange for $1 trillion revenue. 2 3-1, your party earned by winning an election. you don't deal, nothing gets done. that's the way politics works. >> raising taxes doesn't help. >> what it does, lower, the deficit and begins to show that american government can work without people like you basically dictating to politician what's they have to sign it avoid your heat. you've been very successful. >> it's the american people that have said that. not americans for tax reform. >> we'll see. grover norquist, thanks for coming up. it's a good argument. we've cleared up the way people stand right now. i hope i've stopped. >> cut spending, overspending. the only issue, by this administration. >> thanks for coming on. you know i mean it. you know i do. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc.
11:30pm
to do with this? i don't know. the usual? [ blower whirring ] sometimes it pays to switch things up. my - what, my hair? no. car insurance. i switched to progressive and they gave me discounts for the time i spent with my old company. saved a bunch. that's a reason to switch. big savings -- it's a good look for you. [ blower whirring ] [blower stops] the safety was off. out there with a better way. now, that's progressive.
11:31pm
11:32pm
11:33pm
up next, michele bachmann >> once referred to hexsex as homosexuality as bondage, despair and enslavement. they're using her words against her. that's coming up next on "hardball." experiencing hair loss. introducing the new extreme lasercomb from hair club. it's quick, easy and affordable, and the extreme lasercomb is revolutionary. here's how it works. d.h.t. forms around the hair follicle, which shortens the lifespan of your hair. the extreme lasercomb combats hair loss, causing the hair follicle to grow thicker, stronger hair. this new technology is f.d.a.-cleared and clinically proven to work in 93% of candidates. call now for more information and get this free info kit mailed to you in a discreet envelope. hair club is the largest hair restoration provider, offering all proven hair loss solutions: non-surgical bio-matrix process, hair transplants, hair therapies and now the extreme lasercomb. >> hair club is not about one tool. it's about all proven hair loss solutions.
11:34pm
what separates us from all the other hair loss companies is that only hair club provides all the proven technologies and solutions for hair loss that are available. >> announcer: imagine looking in the mirror and turning back time with more hair. call now to see if you're a candidate. call this number to get more information on the extreme lasercomb and all other proven options to get your hair back. just look at these amazing results from hair club's many proven options. >> i found myself wearing hats all the time, and if someone out there has that same feeling, they need to go call hair club right now, because it's changed my life completely. i'm very excited about my hair. >> he was a good-looking guy before, but with his hair now, it's just this newfound confidence and there's a glow about him you just can't match. >> announcer: hair club provides customized hair loss solutions based on your age and type of hair loss. with locations nationwide, there's a hair club center near you. >> what's important is how you feel about yourself and how you look, and if you want to look better and if you want to feel better about yourself, hair club is the way to go. >> i'd look at it in the back and i'd start seeing thinning,
11:35pm
and then it just kept falling out. getting my hair back was the best thing that ever happened to me. >> announcer: call for a free hair analysis and you could have more hair in as little as four weeks. hair club, america's hair loss experts since 1976. call now for your free info kit and free hair analysis.
11:36pm
11:37pm
tropical storm brett is strengthening as it heads away from the bahamas and moves north. police say a mother and four children pulled from a burning home in oregon were murdered before the fire started. borders books after 40 years in business is planning to liquidate its replaning stores putting more than 10,000 employees out of work. now back to "hardball." welcome back to "hardball." michele bachmann's political star rose in minnesota when she decided to take on same-sex marriage and pushed an amendment to the state to ban it. now she'd like everyone to ignore all that, but gay rights groups say they intend to put bachmann's views on gays and her
11:38pm
husband's views front and center in the 2012 presidential race. a friend of mine, president of equality matters and r. clark cooper executive director of log could bein republicans. richard, do you expect to raise this position again aeb again, the position of michele bachmann? >> well, we do. i mean, the bottom line is, her views are way outside of mainstream american political thought and american scientific thought. she has a long history of opposing the most basic rights for gay americans. all we want is have the same rights as everybody else but she has a history of scapegoating and using anti-gay rhetoric in a very potentially dangerous way. so we will call attention to it whenever we think it's appropriate. >> i want to get to clark with a quote she gave. here it is.
11:39pm
a minnesota state senator how many years ago, michele bachmann said if you're involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle, her term, it's bondage. it is personal bondage, personal despair, and personal enslavement. i mean, she make as big distinction between orientation and lifestyle. i'm not sure what that means exactly, clark. are you comfortable with the way she even talks about gay issues politically? >> for starters, let's this orientation, not lifestyle. the point was made in many areas about electability. so doesn't matter where you stand on the political spectrum. a political position regarding the gay community puts herr at fringe with the republican party. i'm not the only -- >> why is she so anti-gay? >> that's a good question. a good question. why is anybody anti-gay? obviously -- >> it's an obsession in terms of her politics. seems to be more than winning votes. i don't know how many she can win, in the movie conservative
11:40pm
areas. her husband also seems to be focused intently often this question of reparative therapy. talking about homosexuality on a radio show last year. let's listen in. >> what do you say when your teenager says she's gay? >> there's that curiosity, but, again, it is as if we have to understand barbarians need to be educated. they need to be disciplined and just because someone feels it or thinks it doesn't mean that we're supposed to go down that road. we have a responsibility as parents and as authority figures not to encourage such thoughts and feelings. >> i mean, chris you know, just listen to that language. that language is like -- from outer space. >> if you even hear about homosexuality you got to run towards it. seems to me people that are gay are gay. though we now from a fairly early age accept it, try to make the most of it.
11:41pm
live a fairly good life, if they can. you know about this. this idea if you hear about it you'll be enticed by it. if a teacher is gay you'll want to join him or her in this orientation. seems it's scare toy people like her and her husband. so scary they've formed this institute to talk people, pray them out of the gay orientation. what do you make of this? i thought this was going away. i thought the american people -- >> it is going away. you know, i do think -- i think it is going away and i think that this, some of this language is a throwback to the old days when, you know, anti-gay rhetoric could be used to excite conservative base voters, and to excite people about particular candidates, but i think that you know, this -- these scare tactics don't work anymore. this is a very mainstream issue. in new york where we got, you know, same-sex marriage through just last month, i mean, it was the republicans. republican caucus in the -- >> yeah.
11:42pm
let's not overstate the overwhelming republican push for same-sex marriage, richard. >> there are a lot of main stream republicans for this. >> one example -- >> ted olsen. >> you're right. richard, you're across the aisle. here's rudy giuliani questioning the republican party against getting involved in this gay marriage issue. less listen to the former mayor. >> i think that marriage is between a man and woman but i think that republican party would be well advised to get the heck out of people's bedrooms and let these things get decided by states. i don't know what the heck the republican party wants to do getting involved in the people's sexual lives and personal lives. stay out of it. we'd be a much more successful political party. >> my dad used to go to bed worrying about the debt. worrying about fiscal responsibility. i do occasionally worry about debts bigger than our gdp. i'm with grover on the idea of spending. i wish he picked the fight in that.
11:43pm
it's his intransigence on the other stuff. straight people going to bed at night worried about gay people? >> no. >> then why think focus here? >> chris, most republicans are worries about overspending in the government. most americans -- >> i do, too. >> most republicans want to address debt, address the size of government. so because most americans and most republicans who are elected to office want to address those broader issues that affect all americans. everybody needs a job. everybody's affected by the economy, and most people want to see resolution to government, you know, lower government spending and address tax reform. that said, when an issue like one's orientation starts to eclipse the dialogue, that any solid fiscal conservative messaging that's out there is lost. it gets lost in the cacophony of any anti-gay rhetoric. there are many -- >> i tell you, i wish it were true republicans had dropped this. i tell you, barack obama, who,
11:44pm
you know, has got, you know, not a perfect record, but, boy, i tell you, compared to any of these republicans running today, he looks pretty good. >> one point. i'm going to watch the republican platform. if it's in, there i'm going to jump on it. if you get rid of it, we'll get rid of it. i still think they'll jam in this sacredness of marriage and they don't like gays. thank you, clark. thank you, richard. >> by the way, it is being addressed with the party. so -- barack obama's failed economy. >> here it is -- his position -- got to go. i'm sorry, clark. you got your shot and i appreciate it. up next, scotland yard, a resignation as the rupert murdoch phone scandal explodes again and again. where were the top police with the murdoch empire? is the same thing happening here? we're talking to jude law and people like that. this is "hardball" only on msnbc.
11:45pm
where do i go from here? consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. call now for a free information kit and guide to medicare to get started. basically, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. a medicare supplement insurance plan helps cover some of those expenses. and that can save you up to thousands of dollars a year in out-of-pocket costs. plus, you can keep any doctor who accepts medicare patients. together with medicare, an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan could be the kind of coverage you're looking for. in fact, it could make a world of difference. call now for your free medicare guide and information kit about aarp medicare supplement insurance plans, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company.
11:46pm
texas governor rick perry will decide in the next two weeks whether he'll run for president. he's said he's been called to run. he's getting more and more comfortable that this is what he's been called to do. this is what america needs. those are his quotes. perry talked on session once is holding a prayer event in houston three weeks from now. we'll be right back. we're back. now?! [ female announcer ] crest whitestrips two hour express. in just two hours you can have a noticeably whiter smile that lasts for months. hi. hi. [ female announcer ] two hour whitestrips from crest. life opens up when you do.
11:47pm
with other top companies. with an esurance quote, you know you're getting a great deal. you can thank our tech team for that. sure, i'll let them know. bye-bye. aha! anything you want to share? with the tech team? oh, i'm dating that girl in accounting. seriously? yeah, we're pretty serious. [ female announcer ] know if you're getting a great deal. see for yourself at esurance. technology when you want it. people when you don't.
11:48pm
we're back. news continues to break in the hacking scandal in britain. a former top murdoch aide rebekah brooks was arrested yesterday. the top two men resigned over
11:49pm
questions about a former news of the world reporter and a whittle blower turned up dead. stephanie gosk is covering the story. michael wolff is author of the man who knows the news inside the secret world of rupert murdoch. to the tangled web that may be the best way to describe this hacking scandal as the parties involved, murdoch's empire, government and the police all have ties one to another. it begins with rupert murdoch, the chief of news corporation, and his son james who handles european news. on friday, les hidden resigned, he ran murdoch's dow jones and published the "wall street journal." rebekah brooks ran the tabloid news of the word and went on to run news international. she quit and was arrested yesterday. brooks' deputy at news of the world was andy colson who ran the paper when much of the hacking was going on. he resigned and became top aide for prime minister who he resigned over the hacking
11:50pm
scandal. the prime minister is also friends with rebekah brooks and james murdoch. back to coulson. he employed clive goodman who hired a private investigator to hack the phones of aides to the royal family. scotland yardman the investigation into the hacking and arrested goodman, colson and brooks. paul stevenson resigned. part because he hired neil wallace used to work at news of the worlds. john yates, number two at cotland yard step down yesterday because he refused to open the hacking scandal investigation a few years ago and also has ties to neil wallace. stephanie, we've tried to put that together as best we can, give us more on this tangled web in britain. >> chris, it's not easy and people will look at that and go huh?
11:51pm
it is very confusing, this has been a mind-bending story because news corp. and its influence in this country is wide spread and we're now seeing that. this has been an unbelievable 36 hours where you have the top two men in charge of scotland yard resigning, rebekah brooks getting arrested, now this strange news of this journalist who has shown up dead, and what you are seeing right now is the affect of this web on various facets of society here in this country, including the police force and parliament and the government. david cameron coming under increasingly intense rebuke for his relationships with news corp. as well. chris? >> michael wolffe, bring it on home. when you look at this story and cover it, develop it, what do you make of this thing?
11:52pm
andy coulson, he apparently had a role here. >> it's just extraordinary. i mean, when everyone who's involved with this talks about it, they just shake their heads, it's not just 36 hours, it's literally two weeks of the most incredible developments. every one of these, each one of these developments would be -- would be in a normal time headline making for months on end, but there's new developments every day. >> okay, let's get to the question of the prime minister. why did the prime minister hire andy coulson? was it at the advice of rebekah brooks? >> i'm going to tell you exactly why he did it. i was involved with -- they talk about this openly, i've spent time with all of these people, including the prime minister. rupert murdoch did not like david cameron. i've spent lots of time with murdoch mumbling about cameron, what a slickster he is. he liked gordon brown.
11:53pm
rebekah brooks, however, likes david cameron, and she set out to convince rupert he ought to go with cameron. and one of the things here, she went to cameron and said you hire our guy, andy coulson. if you do that, i can help bring rupert around, and she succeeded. >> and he hired the prime minister, the candidate of prime minister, hired her, hired coulson, then ended up getting what, the respect or what? how would you describe how rupert responded to that deal? >> actually, rupert responded grudgingly. he still doesn't like david cameron, he liked gordon brown, but rebekah and his son james wanted this, this was their show, he was trying to be hands off, and plus he got a man in number 10 downing street, and that was a victory. >> tomorrow, you have the high case, this case is going before a parliamentary committee.
11:54pm
you're going to have rupert murdoch, his son, james, stephanie, you're going to have -- what's her name, rebekah brooks, they are going to be there under oath. will the name jude law come up? will the name -- who else is going to come up in this case? jude law has been apparently involved in this. >> let me back up a little bit, it's unclear whether they'll be under oath in the same way people are under oath and testimony in congress, but you are going to hear pressing questions and difficult questions, and what three of them have said is they are going to avoid any question that jeopardizes the ongoing investigation in scotland yard. >> thank you very much. this case is wide open and just keeps bigger of the thank you very much, when we return, let me finish with a agreement moment in america. even in defeat, great news about america, women, sports, what men root for these days. let me finish tonight with a grand american sighting, it's what everybody saw yesterday when they went past a restaurant, a bar, or any other place where there were people and a television.
11:55pm
a huge bunch of men, mainly, cheering the american women's soccer team in the world cup. the howls and whoops, as i said, the groups i saw were overwhelmingly men and not all young men by any mean.
11:56pm
11:57pm
11:58pm
let me finish tonight with a grand american sighting, it's what everybody saw yesterday when they went past a restaurant, a bar, or any other place where there were people and a television. a huge bunch of men, mainly, cheering the american women's soccer team in the world cup. the howls and whoops, as i said, the groups i saw were
11:59pm
overwhelmingly men and not all young men by any mean. everyone in this country lucky enough to have kids knows how much girls, especially, love the game. ever since 1972 when title ix was added to our rights, women have had an equal shot in sports in school. here's a more recent statistic, there's more tweeting per second during sunday's match than any time in human history. people not just wanted to watch and see us compete and hopefully pull it off, they wanted to share the excitement with friends and family. great stuff for the country, great stuff. very important, it's about an equal playing field, starting when you're young, learning equality at a young age is a very good thing to learn. we all need to hear the cheers of america hearing for us. so good for japan, but great for

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)